after the First World War turned out to be far
more difficult than the British had expected. Not
all the different ethnic and religious groups
accepted the Arab rulers imposed on them. The
largely desert regions of the former Ottoman
lands that Britain had now acquired, with their
stretches of irrigated territory along the coastlines
and river banks, were divided into Palestine,
Transjordan and Iraq. The ‘royal’ protégés whom
Britain appointed to rule the Arab states were two
sons of the Hashemite Sharif Husain of Mecca,
Abdullah and Faisal. What territories they would
actually rule remained uncertain, a detail not suf-
ficiently worked out in 1919, especially as the
French had their own ideas about how to govern
Syria and Lebanon, the Arab territories that had
been assigned to them. Abdullah had hoped to
become king of Iraq with Faisal as king of Syria.
Faisal actually established himself in Syria for a
short time until he was driven out by the French.
The British then decided to install Faisal as king
of Iraq, which left his brother disappointed.
Abdullah, at the head of a contingent of tribal
forces, in turn threatened to avenge Faisal’s
unceremonious expulsion from French Syria, at
the same time putting forward claims to rule over
an Arab Palestine, claims that were totally unac-
ceptable to the British. Instead, the territories
across the Jordan, the Transjordan, were separ-
ated from Palestine and constituted into a separ-
ate state in 1921 with Amir Abdullah as ruler.
This was intended as no more than a temporary
arrangement until the French agreed to allow
Abdullah to become king of Syria. But this the
French never did. Syria thus nurses a historical
grievance. The ruler of small, barren Transjordan
hankered after Jerusalem but was totally depend-
ent on Britain.
The creation of these states was not based on
any logical or natural divisions. Nor were they
based on the Wilsonian principle of what the
people wished, even supposing this could have
been accurately discovered. Instead they derived
from machinations of a few leaders and from the
power play of Britain and France. Ottoman domin-
ion was more easily destroyed than replaced.
The one country with clear national frontiers
was Egypt. Britain’s dominance was difficult to
justify after the First World War. Egypt had
received continuous Western tutelage since the
British occupation began, and an efficient admin-
istration had been built up with outstanding and
powerful British proconsuls, modestly named
‘consul-generals’ (because Turkish suzerainty was
acknowledged until 1914). The Sudan too was
under effective British control, as we have seen,
though in theory it was shared with Egypt.
During the war of 1914–18 Egypt was declared
a British protectorate; a strong military base was
established and all protest was suppressed. The
war nevertheless brought about change. It created
wealth among a minority of Egyptian merchants,
and a small Egyptian elite evolved, whose
members became determined to remove British
control and govern the country in their own
interests rather than Britain’s. But they were split
between the supporters of the monarchy and sup-
porters of a nationalist party, the Wafd, led by
Sa’ad Zaghlul, who in 1918 made himself
spokesman of the nationalist cause. How could
Egypt be denied independence when it was
promised to the backward Bedouin Arabs? After
riots and demonstrations Egypt was offered
limited independence. Zaghlul objected. He also
demanded that Egypt should have a say in the
Sudan, for control of the headwaters of the Nile
was regarded as vital by the Egyptians, who were
dependent upon its water. No one in Cairo would
conclude a treaty on British terms, so Britain in
1922 unilaterally proclaimed a limited Egyptian
independence but reserved all those rights con-
sidered essential to British interests including mil-
itary control of the Suez Canal.
So-called constitutional politics now revolved
around the rivalry for power among the group
of Wafdist politicians supported by wealthy land-
owners and the corrupt supporters of the king.
Between Britain and an elected Egyptian Wafd
government a modus vivendi was at long last
achieved by the signature of an Anglo-Egyptian
alliance in August 1936. British troops were with-
drawn from Egypt’s main towns but British air
and land bases were maintained to guard the Suez
Canal, and the Royal Navy had free use of the har-
bour of Alexandria. In the event of war or the
imminent threat of it, the Egyptian government
1
THE MIDDLE EAST BETWEEN TWO WORLD WARS, 1919–45 423
